Shh we wont tell anyone (school)

sassyblue

duchy wrote: »

Do you not ? Where does this belief come from ?
I've worked in education and also my son was statemented in school and there's always more kids in need of extra support than there is funding. If children have AEN (something other parents may not be aware of) and need extra support in class in the form of specialist equipment or an extra classroom assistant in the class where do you think the money comes from to buy the equipment or pay the classroom assistant's wages ? The school has a limited budget not a bottomless money pit !

Additionally all schools do help families with uniform , trips etc in a variety of ways -unless you are one of those families you (rightly) wouldn't have a clue about it -it wouldn't be any of your business if another family was in need.

(As if l have to justify myself to you :rotfl:) My belief comes from my own childs school, and my nephew's school where l help out. l said l don't think there are 'that many' kids needing extra funding not that there are none.

If there is specialist equipment needed or extra classroom assistants it comes from the school via the education authority or some other tax payers Government funding body, no? Loving your quizzes!!

'The school has a budget'...(as l have sympathised with all along) wow l haven't been so shocked since l learned water was wet.

Yes people can get grants for school uniform if they're in need but this shouldn't come from claiming for 'free' school meals.

And l never said it was my business about families who need extra help so why point it out l have no idea. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder??

jellyhead

sassyblue wrote: »

Yes people can get grants for school uniform if they're in need but this shouldn't come from claiming for 'free' school meals.

It does though. I don't know which pot it comes from but you can only get the help if you are eligible for FSM.

sassyblue

Svenena wrote: »

I'm afraid you're wrong. There is extra money available ON TOP of that provided for the actual meals.

Point taken but it's a ridiculous way to word things that being the case.

I see it also says:
Total funding for the Pupil Premium is £625m in 2011-12, and will rise to £2.5 billion a year by 2014-15.

So that's nearly £2 billion that needs to be deducted from other Government funded projects in the next 2-3 years.... :cool:

1more?

duchy wrote: »

So my understanding is if I claim for free school meals
1 If my child has those meals the school has one budget that pays for his meal
However in addition -

2 for every child in the school on the "eligable of free meals " list
the school gets OTHER money into a seperate budget that is part of the
general school budget to pay for additional things -as those children are considered economically deprived so the school gets more money to ensure stuff like trips, extra equipment , tuition etc is covered .

So qualifying for school meals is the marker -I don't see fraud in there just a badly
thought out way to tag which schools need the extra funding.

Silly way to do things but I can see the schools need to play the game or
lose out on funding which impacts all the children. Who the heck thinks up these daft ideas ?

hi there All
didnt expect there to be more replies here but the quote above it exactly how i understand it
1 pot of money to pay for meals eaten by the child - not for those that dont take up the meals
another pot of money (£488 per pupil entitled to fsm) to improve standards across the school, money can be used for extra staff, equiptment ect
no fraud there - this is a goverment scheme & the criteria is for each child entitled to fsm

also it does make a difference to school in the league tables that are no longer called league tables

Valli

sassyblue wrote: »

My little one starts swimming soon and even though it's funded they're still asking for contributions every week. I also help with fundraising for the school!

I'm interested to know how they are 'justifying' this. Swimming lessons are part of the school curriculum (I think each child is entitled to 3 terms swimming) and are not 'educational visits' and voluntary contributions shouldn't be asked for...

jellyhead

Is it part of the curriculum though? What if any kids who didn't pay coach fare stayed behind and did another form of PE?

I've seen lots of posts on here saying that people have to pay coach fare to get to the swimming pool. We don't pay. They go on a yellow school bus.

Valli

Yes it is part of the curriculum; having said that neither of the Vallikids went because we'd already taken them to swimming lessons; the school focussed its resources on the kids who could not swim, because the pool could accomodate the whole class. The aim is that all children should learn to swim sometime during their primary school years.

daska

KS2 - Swimming activities and water safety must be chosen as one of the areas of activity unless pupils have completed the full Key Stage 2 teaching requirements in relation to swimming activities and water safety during Key Stage 1. Pupils should be able to swim unaided more than a distance of at least 25 metres. Advice and guidance for teachers and others to support the planning and teaching of swimming is available on the Department's website.

BUT, as I understand it the norm is 3 half terms of swimming. If your child is swimming all year round that might require a contribution but it should be optional because it is a curriculum requirement.

Svenena

sassyblue wrote: »

Point taken but it's a ridiculous way to word things that being the case.

I see it also says:
Total funding for the Pupil Premium is £625m in 2011-12, and will rise to £2.5 billion a year by 2014-15.

So that's nearly £2 billion that needs to be deducted from other Government funded projects in the next 2-3 years.... :cool:

I guess the way it actually works is about distributing the money in a different way. So say they (the government) have a budget of £10 billion to spend on education (completely made up figure, lol); instead of saying, let's divide this equally between every school (allowing for different numbers of pupils), they instead say, let's divide £7 billion equally between every school (allowing for different number of pupils), and the other £3 billion, let's divide that unequally, giving more where it's needed.

Whether FSM is the best measure of 'where-it's-needed' or not is a bigger question, but there's never going to be an easy way of measuring "deprivation", and the more complicated the method, the more it costs to administer, so I suppose that's one of the reason it's used - because there are existing methods in place to assess whether families are eligible.

Valli

That's a good way of putting it Svenena.

I could point you to a school not far from here in an area I was told was one of the most deprived in the country. They have a dedicated sure start centre attached and lots of financial support for initiatives. They even have an allotment/garden type set up, with greenhouses and polytunnels and employ a qualified, full time gardener/teacher who runs lunchtime clubs and after school clubs in an attempt to encourage the kids and their parents to grow, cook and eat fresh fruit and veg. It's an infant school.